Slashdot Mirror
Hack a Million Systems and Earn a Job
An anonymous reader writes "It has been a number of years since the fantasy that hackers will be offered a job by those who they hacked was even a potential reality, but this might still be the case in New Zealand. An 18-year-old hacker responsible for writing a number of applications used by an online group called 'the A-Team' that allowed the creation of a million-plus machine botnet and a range of credit card fraud activities to take place, has walked free from court sans conviction despite pleading guilty. And to top it all off, the NZ police force were interested in talking to the hacker about working for them, and 'several computer programming companies' were also chasing him for his skills."
The crown failed to show criminal intent. (see above).
Hitting a child was *always* illegal in NZ. There was a defense in law for a parent of 'reasonable chastisement'. This has recently been removed.
Did you know that it is now even illegal to smack your child in NZ?
Did you know, if you smack your wife in the shopping mall, she can press charges? If your wife turns up to the hospital bruised and battered and says that you did it, you'd be fronting the police also.
Those laws aren't in the least extreme, since children are not in a position to press charges on their own behalf.
I tell you what. this coutry is great in so many respects but they are really bad at punishing people.
That is something I can't argue with, but the reasons the system is broken are the same why the health system is broken, education and others. They don't work properly because there are finite resources and judges are forced to give sentences which don't flood the prison system. You want tougher sentences for existing criminality, then you'll need bigger prisons. Then you'll hear "why am I paying $$$ in taxes to support those crims in prison, giving them three meals a day plus free color television, etc..etc..rant rant rant".
Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
As a New Zealander, I can assure you that, despite what has been represented in the media, it is not illegal to smack your child here. What happened was that the defence of 'reasonable force' was removed from the crime of child abuse. What that means is that you can smack you child, but you can not beat the crap out of your child and then claim you were just disciplining them.
fyi: I heard a policeman say on the radio yesterday that he definitely has *not* been offered a job at this stage. dunno why all the news stories are running that one.
Assault is illegal. There is a legal defence of self-defence. So you may defend yourself against a 'street thug' but not continue to beat him (to the point of e.g punishment or to 'teach him a leasson'.)
Rubbish he pleaded guilty and was then discharged without conviction. That is deemed to be an acquittal, but it doesn't mean he didn't intentionally break the law. The judge just gave him another chance. Note he was ordered to pay a large amount of compensation for his wrongs.
Why the hell does this only have +2 funny?
And why is it not "insightful"?
It's the ultimate trouth we all should agree to.
Maybe while shedding a tear, but agreeing is inevitable.
Assault is illegal. The crimes act defines what is and what is not assault.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/whole.html
Is self defence legal? According to section 48 yes.
Is using reasonable force to prevent someone from stealing my property legal? According to section 52 yes.
This business of saying something is illegal yet one has a "legal defence" is muddleheaded. Either an act is legal or illegal.
To defend oneself from an attack from a 'street thug' is not assault. To physically injure the 'street thug' for the purpose of revenge or punishment is an assault.
At the risk of extending this rather off-topic fork, I feel its important to correct a mis-truth in the above.
By removing the defence of reasonable force there is no longer a defence for smacking your child; how is that NOT illegal?
For clarity, the truth is that it has always been 'illegal' to smack your kids (ala 'assault anyone') but reasonable force has always been a valid defence for parents, in the course of disciplining their kids. No longer the case, making prosecutions much more likely to succeed. Net result is that we now have busybodies and narkers stepping in...
News coverage from when it became law: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10440080%5D
Noted as the most extreme law in the world on the subject: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0705/S00223.htm
A father gets a warning put on his police record for flicking his childs ear:
http://stuff.co.nz/4354765a10.html
The latter occurred because a bystander 'took umbrage' and an off-duty police officer phoned it in. The guy then winds up surrounded by 6 cops!
Sorry but I couldnt let you spread mis-truths about New Zealand Law. It is illegal to smack your child here, because there is no legal defence for what essentially is an assault in the eyes of the law. Splitting hairs further has no value.
-.-. --.-
Aspergers isn't a personality disorder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder#List_of_personality_disorders_defined_in_ICD-10_.28F60-F69.29
It's a neurobiological disorder.
http://www.udel.edu/bkirby/asperger/aswhatisit.html
We are all, of course, ultimately responsible for our actions. ... Except that some neuro-atypical people may not be. But I think the judge had the right idea here.
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
Firstly, we don't have mortgage crisis. We've had a few high-risk property investment companies collapsing, sure. But it's a long way from a crisis yet. And to compare our woes with what the US is experiencing is to really underestimate their situation.
As for our "third world" power generation, two thirds of our power is generated from renewable sources (mostly hydro and geothermal). Which means, sure, we have times (like now) when the water in our hydro lakes is getting a little low, and we have to conserve. On the other hand, it means that we're that much less reliant on oil, a power source that's going to become more expensive, rapidly.
Oh, and the rise of youth crime is a myth. A pervasive one, sure. But in reality, crime rates have been falling for twelve years now, and youth crime as a percentage of offending has stayed steady across the same period. Combine that with an increasing population (which you'd expect to see raise per-capita crime rates), and the rise of cellphones and associated crime reporting levels, and we're looking pretty damn low on crime at the moment.
=w=
RTFA. The judge let him slide because he's (apparently) a retard. The theory seems to be: smart enough to steal from thousands of people, too dumb to know that it's wrong. He is effectively above the law, because the law is a liberal ass.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.